More Articles

Cameron Sterling's request for a DNA test appeared doomed from the start.

Nobody could have guessed it would blast a giant hole in the state's DNA testing law.

Applications for inmate DNA testing in Ohio always have been a long shot but none more so than
in cases such as Sterling's. That's because the Ashtabula County man pleaded guilty.

Under Ohio law, a judge couldn't even consider a DNA test for inmates who pleaded guilty unless
the prosecutor agreed.

Ohio was one of only a few states to make additional demands on such inmates. Requiring them to
obtain the consent of the prosecutor created an all-but-impassable roadblock.

Of the 92 Ohio inmates who applied for a DNA test after pleading guilty,
The Dispatch found, only one received testing. It confirmed his guilt. Inmates
who pleaded guilty represent nearly a third of Ohio's DNA applications.

Shutting out people who pleaded guilty ignores a whole realm of potentially wrongful
convictions, as exonerations in other states show.

Nationally, 11 inmates admitted rapes and murders, only to be exonerated later by DNA. Many of
them had cut deals to avoid life sentences or the death penalty, usually following disputed
confessions to police. Others were mentally ill or retarded and swept up in a system they didn't
understand.

Sterling, charged with raping an 11-year-old girl, says he feared a mandatory life sentence. He
agreed to an Alford plea -- essentially not contesting the charges while maintaining his innocence
-- to a lesser rape charge in 1991.

As soon as Ohio passed a DNA law in 2003, Sterling applied. The prosecutor opposed testing, so
it was automatically denied. Sterling appealed.

Then prosecutors offered to support a DNA test -- if Sterling dropped his lawsuits against the
county claiming that his rights had been violated.

Forget it, Sterling said. He wanted the test and to proceed with his lawsuits.

Sterling's case went to the Ohio Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously in May that giving
prosecutors sole power to reject a DNA test is unconstitutional.

That meant Sterling could get his test, and it opened a door for others.

But testing in Sterling's case still hasn't been done. The prosecutor, after fighting testing
for more than four years, now says he can't find the sperm samples collected from the victim. But
he's still looking. Prosecutor Thomas Sartini didn't respond to repeated requests for comment.

Sterling was paroled in September after nearly 17 years in prison. He lives an ostracized,
secluded life as a convicted sex offender in a small town. He's frustrated but optimistic about the
prospect of clearing his name.

"In 2003, I turned my life over to Jesus Christ. Since then, I've won everything."